1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA Case No. ________________________ COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

RENATA SINGLETON, MARC MITCHELL, LAZONIA BAHAM, JANE DOE, TIFFANY LACROIX, FAYONA BAILEY, and SILENCE IS VIOLENCE;

 Plaintiffs

, v. LEON CANNIZZARO, in his official capacity as District Attorney of Orleans Parish and in his individual capacity; DAVID PIPES, IAIN DOVER, JASON NAPOLI, ARTHUR MITCHELL, TIFFANY TUCKER, MICHAEL TRUMMEL, MATTHEW HAMILTON, INGA PETROVICH, LAURA RODRIGUE, and JOHN DOE, in their individual capacities;

 Defendants

.

Case 2:17-cv-10721 Document 1 Filed 10/17/17 Page 1 of 62

 

2

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

This civil rights action challenges the Orleans Parish District Attorney

’s

 

Office’s

unconstitutional policy of using extrajudicial and unlawful means to coerce, arrest, and imprison crime victims and witnesses. The plaintiffs in this action are victims and witnesses of crime and a non-profit organization that advocates for victims in Orleans Parish. Each has been harmed by

Defendants’ unconstitutional acts.

Pursuant to official policies, practices, and customs of Defendant Orleans Parish District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro, prosecutors routinely issue their own fabricated subpoenas directly

from the District Attorney’s Office— 

without any judicial approval or oversight

 — 

in order to coerce victims and witnesses into submitting to interrogations by prosecutors outside of court. These fraudulent documents create the false impression that meeting with the District Attorney is required by law, and they threaten crime victims and witnesses with fines, arrest, and imprisonment if they do not obey. If that unlawful coercion does not succeed, Defendants routinely obtain arrest warrants to put crime victims and witnesses in jail.

In the past five years alone, Defendants have sought “material witness” warrants at least

150 times. In a significant number of applications for these warrants, Defendants make false statements, omit material facts, and rely on plainly insufficient allegations no reasonable  prosecutor would believe could justify the arrest of a witness or a victim of crime. If prosecutors told the whole story, these warrants would never be issued. In addition, Defendants ensure crime victims and witnesses languish in jail. Defendants habitually seek and obtain extraordinarily high secured money bonds for victims and witnesses, ranging up to $500,000, and sometimes no bond at all. These amounts often dwarf the bond

Case 2:17-cv-10721 Document 1 Filed 10/17/17 Page 2 of 62

 

3 amounts set for criminal defendants themselves

 — 

and they ensure these victims and witnesses are trapped in jail, even when the defendant in the criminal case may be released. Defendants then deny victims a prompt court appearance, where the victim could challenge her detention or the conditions of her release. As a result, victims and witnesses routinely wait weeks or even months in jail before they are brought before a judge. One rape victim spent 12 days in jail before her first court appearance. A victim of child sex trafficking was jailed for 89 days

 —including Christmas and New Year’s Day— 

 before she had an opportunity to challenge her confinement.

Defendants’ policies are designed to create a culture of fear and intimidation that chills

crime victims and witnesses from asserting their constitutional rights. As a result of these  policies, crime victims and witnesses in Orleans Parish know that if they exercise their right not to speak with an investigating prosecutor, they will face harassment, threats, arrest, and jail. For instance, when Plaintiff Renata Singleton, an accountant for a charter school system and the victim in a domestic violence case, declined to speak to Defendants, they arrested and  jailed her for five days on a $100,000 bond. Upon being booked into jail,

Ms. Singleton’s clothes

were taken, and she was given an orange jumpsuit. When she appeared in court, she was shackled at her hands and feet. Metal chains tethered her to the other prisoners. The defendant, her former boyfriend and alleged abuser, had paid his $3,500 secured bond at arraignment and was released. He came to court from home in his own clothes. He pled guilty to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to probation, avoiding a jail sentence altogether. Ms. Singleton

’s

experience is but one example of the practices challenged in this action. Other crime victims have been threatened and arrested in front of their friends and family. Their names now appear online in publicly accessible arrest databases. They have had to expend

Case 2:17-cv-10721 Document 1 Filed 10/17/17 Page 3 of 62